I was replying to someone who said how fantastic it is that the guy was able to make it for free. I'm not saying it's all completely bad, again Adobe subscription model and past piracy tolerance allowed many people who couldn't afford their stuff to use it while paying less or nothing, just adding nuance about "free"
Of course! And I think it's fair to require people to be honest.
I just fundamentally disagree with this line of thinking:
> even a subscription is better than royalties
Royalties are a great business model that allows more creators to create. You can dislike it, but I genuinely don't know that this game would exist with a different business model, and I want it to be easy to make art (or other things!)
And while there were a bunch of interesting side effects of piracy (people who pirate more music were bigger fans of music and spent more later - correlation/causation questions obvs), I would strongly prefer that the easy thing to do (ie cheapest/lowest friction to get started) be legal
> I genuinely don't know that this game would exist with a different business model, and I want it to be easy to make art
I think the guy did it on enthusiasm and if he used say Godot he could probably have a pretty good result too, if less impressive visually. But you have good points, sure.
